Return of the Sheep! - JocMeister(A) vs. MrKane(J)

[Lokasenna]

I wouldn't give up just yet. You had a minor setback - when your units hadn't had a chance to build any organic forts yet. Send in some PTs?

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: offenseman

If he sets up a pattern of bombarding every night you know exactly where to find the enemy. Send a strong SCTF to meet it. Anything available that is close?

Sadly no. With the KB based at Noumea I had evacuated everything but the CA TF used in the previous attack. They are safe hidden behind Tasmania but with the KB roaming the Tasman Sea and 200 Nells/Betties jumping between Brisbane and Noumea it would be almost impossible to get something into the area.

The full fleet is on its way but I don´t think taking on the full KB + LBA is a wise choice right now. [:)]

[JocMeister]

[font="Verdana"] 16th of May -42 [/font]
______________________________________________________________________________

Horrible, horrible day on the ground.

------------------------
China
------------------------
About 40.000 casualties suffered in various battles. Mostly on the Chunking plains as armor and bombers wreck havoc.

------------------------
PI
------------------------
Another 17.000 casualties here as the last stronghold on Mindanao surrenders. Another ID free for Tom to send elsewhere.

------------------------
Something Something
------------------------
I have no choice but to pull out. Crap. [:(]

Night Naval bombardment of Brisbane at 96,160

Japanese Ships
CA Ashigara
CA Nachi
CA Haguro
CA Myoko
DD Tokitsukaze
DD Amatsukaze
DD Shiranui
DD Isokaze

Allied ground losses:
258 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 16 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 15 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled

Night Naval bombardment of Brisbane at 96,160

Japanese Ships
CL Jintsu
CL Naka
CL Sendai
DD Asashio
DD Arashi
DD Nowaki
DD Hamakaze

Allied ground losses:
268 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 20 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 21 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Naval bombardment of Brisbane at 96,160

Japanese Ships
BB Hyuga
BB Ise
BB Fuso

Allied ground losses:
880 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 33 disabled
Non Combat: 13 destroyed, 59 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 24 (1 destroyed, 23 disabled)
Vehicles lost 11 (1 destroyed, 10 disabled)

Naval bombardment of Brisbane at 96,160

Japanese Ships
BB Haruna
BB Kongo
CA Kinugasa
CA Aoba

Allied ground losses:
661 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 32 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 42 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled
Vehicles lost 11 (1 destroyed, 10 disabled)

In the air we do a little better coming up just shy of getting a 1-1 over Brisbane. But I blow through almost a month worth of replacements doing so. 12 Pilots KIA, 10 WIA and 2 MIA.

Its a shame it didn´t work. But I realize now that even if I could have captured Brisbane holding it would have been impossible unless I can control the sea. At least the units gained some EXP....

------------------------
VP Score
------------------------
With the loss of the two old BBs and the massive losses of LCUs Tom nets over 1000 VPs over the last 6 days. And I have barely seen the beginning of the carnage in China yet. I just can´t see how I could avoid AV. I think Tom has about 12-15k more VPs to collect in China. Add to that probably 2-3k more VPs in OZ from the STRAT bombing and he will land somewhere around 40k VPs.

That would mean I would have to get at minimum 3500 AVs in just 6,5 months. I just can´t see where I would get them from.

Admittedly today has been a very bad day for morale and I hope it feels a little better tomorrow.

[witpqs]

This is combined arms beyond the ground units - in this case guns from the sea. They are big, they are on steady gun platforms, and when they find the range (and with troops not yet dug in) they are effective. You just have to find ways to live with it until you are the one dishing out the punishment. [:(]

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

With the loss of the two old BBs and the massive losses of LCUs Tom nets over 1000 VPs over the last 6 days. And I have barely seen the beginning of the carnage in China yet. I just can´t see how I could avoid AV. I think Tom has about 12-15k more VPs to collect in China. Add to that probably 2-3k more VPs in OZ from the STRAT bombing and he will land somewhere around 40k VPs.

That would mean I would have to get at minimum 3500 AVs in just 6,5 months. I just can´t see where I would get them from.

Admittedly today has been a very bad day for morale and I hope it feels a little better tomorrow.

On really bad days or weeks in my games I have sometimes just looked around the map and counted how many Really Big troop bags my opponent had left. One thing with losing the PI is you only lose it once and it's over. Same with Singers. Same with Soerbaja. You still have China to lose and you will. But other than that are there any more disasters coming? If there are can you consolidate?

I also offer Standard Shoulder Pat #27 by pointing out the immense amount of fuel he's burning.

[offenseman]

Fuel- not just hollow words. He is burning a LOT of fuel. He must be running a lot of TK convoys to Rabaul, Truk, or Noumea (others perhaps) to supply them. Maybe you can find a few and determine his routing.

[ny59giants]

I didn't get a chance to comment, but you have already seen the results from his naval bombardment attacks. Your troops cannot win with that happening on a regular basis. After your 4/42 upgrades, lots and lots of subs need to operate off Brisbane up to Horn Island and over to Noumea. Maybe you can get lucky and damage a few of his CAs or larger.

[JocMeister]

Wasn´t I supposed to feel more optimistic today? [:D]

Strangely enough no turn from Tom. So I spent a lot of time going through the map trying to find 3500 VPs somewhere. I just can´t find it. I would need Rangoon AND Noumea or somehow stop Tom in China. I´ve pretty much already maxed out the VPs I can from expanding current bases in India/WC/Canada.

-I´m not going to be able to do anything about China. Supply is now in the red even in Southern China where troops have been static since the beginning of the war. Among the rest of the troops any LCU outside Chunking have 0 supply. There is a little inside Chungking (800 odd supply) now but I´m reluctant on leaving troops there as I´m afraid it will be just giving away VPs.

-Rangoon might not be impossible. But it would take me 3-4 months to move out all the troops needed from SOPAC and pretty much leave SOPAC/OZ to its fate.

-Noumea will be impossible as long as most of the IJN is parked there. That unless I can sink it which I´m not even going to try and do.

I´m also in that kind of odd seat where I know we will play on even if Tom achieves AV. So I don´t want to do anything to break myself like trying to land at Noumea right under KB. Or go for the Marianas...that "Hail Mary". If it wasn´t for that AV I would just sit and consolidate my position while expanding in NOPAC and CENTPAC. But there are no VPs to be had there. Perhaps a few in CENTPAC from the small units he left here and there.

For example I know is coming for Pago Pago and the rest of the Samoans. He has the 16th ID prepping for Pago Pago proper the 48th for Upolo. This is nowhere near enough to take the bases. Normally I would just wait and let him come. But now I feel I don´t have the time to sit and wait for an invasion that might not even come...but then again it doesn´t make sense not to...

Right now I feel I need to stop looking at the VPs, do what I think is best. That puts me in a moral dilemma. If I´m not playing 100% to avoid AV I have changed the playing field without letting Tom know I have done so. Even if my ambition is to make a 100% effort to avoid AV I have in my heart already given up on it and this effect my play weather I want it to or not. This leaves Tom in an disadvantageous position where he is playing to maximize VPs but perhaps putting him in a exposed and overextended position.

Any thought on this?

[Bullwinkle58]

You know how I feel about VPs and auto-vic.

I think you should talk to him. He has spoken about this topic a little in his AAR, maybe a month ago or a little more.

But me, I think you're either playing the game or you're on a journey. If you lose the game is there waiting to be played again, maybe better next time, or a different variant. I may lose to Loka, but I learned a lot and there are mistakes I wouldn't make again. Not with so many untried. [:)]

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

You know how I feel about VPs and auto-vic.

I think you should talk to him. He has spoken about this topic a little in his AAR, maybe a month ago or a little more.

But me, I think you're either playing the game or you're on a journey. If you lose the game is there waiting to be played again, maybe better next time, or a different variant. I may lose to Loka, but I learned a lot and there are mistakes I wouldn't make again. Not with so many untried. [:)]

When I talked to him about it sometime ago he said that if we stopped playing at(if) AV we were just wasting time. Don´t want to bail out on him because I believe AV is unavoidable.

Moral dilemma to say the least. I guess the only easy solution is to try and force myself to continue playing to avoid AV and hope you guys slap me on the fingers if I don´t.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister


When I talked to him about it sometime ago he said that if we stopped playing at(if) AV we were just wasting time. Don´t want to bail out on him because I believe AV is unavoidable.

Moral dilemma to say the least. I guess the only easy solution is to try and force myself to continue playing to avoid AV and hope you guys slap me on the fingers if I don´t.

On the first part, I know that's a common thought around here. The first year is hard and kind of tedious for both sides due to all the expanding, falling back, initial building and logistics, pilot training, etc, etc. But OTOH, auto-vic is set at a ratio where if you get to it you really did lose. It takes an Allied position so much worse than history that it's pretty hard to come back to even an average position by 1945. OTOOH though, as I never get tired of saying, the Allies have to get one to win at all. If you did get one in, say, Feb. 1945, he would want to keep playing into 1946 just because you can? I don't know the answer to that.

On the second part I don't consider it a moral dilemma. I save that word for pretty important things. Maybe an ethical dilemma. Or maybe not even that. If you did your best and got beat inside the parameters of the game there's no dilemma I really see. Quitting early is a different question, and simply disappearing, as so many people around here do, is despicable. But in any game--tennis, poker, soccer--when you reach the end and a winner is declared you don't keep playing. If you lose a tennis match in straight sets nobody would consider you unethical if you declined to keep hitting the ball over without keeping score, getting smash after smash in return.

Then there's the question of time and the question of learning. If he gets AV in early 1943 what would it take to "finish" the war to summer 1945? 1500 lifespan hours? More? A standard work year over here is 2000 hours as a point of comparison. Which is up to you, if you're learning new things and it's interesting. Is it? If it's not, if it's painful to lose every day, and you play to AV and it goes against you, there's no obligation to volunteer 1500 hours you could spend with your wife and kids. As I said before, start a new game, maybe with him, maybe another, maybe same set-up and scenario, maybe another. And learn new things.

I've had two times in my game with Loka where I felt like quitting. I told him both times, probably sounded whiny. But I got past it and he was a gentleman about it. If, however, he gets to AV, I don't see the value in playing on. Some might relish trying to take Kwajalein in 1945, but I don't see the point. If you baked in that much bad throw the cake out and mix a new one.

[Spidery]

You inflicted about 300 VP in air loss on the Japanese last month so that makes for about 2,000 VP you should get with just keeping the current tempo of air combat. Have you built all the Soviet bases?

So Rangoon by itself would be enough, or Noumea plus the losses you inflict if he defends it.

You could try everything to get Rangoon, or set up the invasion of Noumea and start raids elsewhere, see if you can distract the KB. Or send surface forces out to clear any pickets he has out and then raid in the North Pacific. If he gets lucky, LBA may sink a carrier, but to do that he will lose 200 planes and that leaves you ahead as far as preventing AV.

I wouldn't launch mad cap adventures (attacking Noumea in the face of the KB) but just increase the tempo of actions to try and get more VP, even at a 2 to 1 loss ratio. Lowpe's game is unusual but at the end of 1942 I think there were something like 5000 air loss VP. If you could get to 5000 air loss on both sides by the end of 1942 that would almost be enough to avoid AV. The Japanese has few counters to Lightnings and 4E during 1942 and in the 2nd half you should be getting enough to rack up some VP.

[Spidery]

At the end of June 1942 in my game against MrKane the VP ratio stood at 23194::8026.
At the end of December 1942 it stood at 37550::12975.

During that time he lost China and regained Noumea and some of the Northern Australia territory. Just gives a feel for how many VP the Allies can gain in the second half of 1942:

Code: Select all

          Japan                   Allied
          July 1st   Jan 1st      July 1st   Jan 1st
 Air:     1340       3314         1496       3847
 Land:    8771       14425        579        1196
 Base:    9969       15628        5231       6155
 Sea:     2138       3368         963        2040 
 Strat:   414        414          0          0
 

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: Spidery

You inflicted about 300 VP in air loss on the Japanese last month so that makes for about 2,000 VP you should get with just keeping the current tempo of air combat. Have you built all the Soviet bases?

So Rangoon by itself would be enough, or Noumea plus the losses you inflict if he defends it.

You could try everything to get Rangoon, or set up the invasion of Noumea and start raids elsewhere, see if you can distract the KB. Or send surface forces out to clear any pickets he has out and then raid in the North Pacific. If he gets lucky, LBA may sink a carrier, but to do that he will lose 200 planes and that leaves you ahead as far as preventing AV.

I wouldn't launch mad cap adventures (attacking Noumea in the face of the KB) but just increase the tempo of actions to try and get more VP, even at a 2 to 1 loss ratio. Lowpe's game is unusual but at the end of 1942 I think there were something like 5000 air loss VP. If you could get to 5000 air loss on both sides by the end of 1942 that would almost be enough to avoid AV. The Japanese has few counters to Lightnings and 4E during 1942 and in the 2nd half you should be getting enough to rack up some VP.

+10. Don't be afraid to get your hands dirty. Meet him with things you can afford to lose - P-39s, P-40s, even some B-17s and B-25s, etc. Sweep him if he's not attacking you. Bomb his airfields at night. Bomb his ports at night. Anything, anything... even if you give him 10 points for every 5 or 8 that you gain, you're still making progress towards avoiding AV. And, as you well know, the point totals and losses in 1942 are as nothing to the monster battles of 1944 and 1945 - if it means a chance at getting an AV of your own in 1945, are 2000 or even 4000 extra points for him in 1942 really going to make that much of a difference to you? Compared to losing to an AV in 1943?

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: Spidery

Lowpe's game is unusual but at the end of 1942 I think there were something like 5000 air loss VP.

+10. Don't be afraid to get your hands dirty. Meet him with things you can afford to lose - P-39s, P-40s, even some B-17s and B-25s, etc. Sweep him if he's not attacking you. Bomb his airfields at night. Bomb his ports at night. Anything, anything... even if you give him 10 points for every 5 or 8 that you gain, you're still making progress towards avoiding AV. And, as you well know, the point totals and losses in 1942 are as nothing to the monster battles of 1944 and 1945 - if it means a chance at getting an AV of your own in 1945, are 2000 or even 4000 extra points for him in 1942 really going to make that much of a difference to you? Compared to losing to an AV in 1943?

Try 7700 victory points.[X(]

[Bullwinkle58]

I agree with everyone that Jocke needs to chip away. It's psychologically hard to lose, lose, lose at 2: 1 and still tell yourself you're "making progress." He can't get there on planes, but he can help. HE REALLY needs to sink some ships, but Mr. K. has been very close to the vest.

His major issue IMO, and why this situation is very different than most glide path AARs on the issue of auto-vic, is the strat VPs. Mr. K. has over 5000. Jocke can't get those back, and he can't inflict same for years. That's a huge number; it's what? 8 full sunk CVs with air wings? With that 5000 plus a fully finished China he's going to be on thin ice for a long, long time.

Alfred always said that too many players worry too much about auto-vic on 1/1/43. That's hard, and rare. Far more danger in the summer of 1943 when the ratio is exactly the same, but third-phase mega-campaigns are coming to fruition in Oz, India, what have you. And if real progress is not made in 1943 the door slams on 1/1/44. It's an Allied treadmill if one gets way behind as Jocke has, and I have in my Lokasenna game.

[JocMeister]

Thanks for the encouragement guys. It helps a lot! [&o]

Not sure why I feel so down about the game. [&:] I gave it some thought while I was driving home today but I can´t really find a reason for it. I guess I´m just stuck in one of those "downs" that seem to hit me from time to time when playing this game.

I´ll start looking at opportunities to hit him where possible. Perhaps a 85.000 man operation will cheer me up? [:)] I havn´t really considered resorting to nightbombing. Usually I try to avoid that when its not STRAT bombing but I guess I can´t really afford not to at this stage right? Tom has certainly not given me any breaks! [:D]

As Steve says those 5000 VP (will possible be 6-7k before Tom is done) will be massive. I need 1200-1700 VPs just to counter those. A huge number for an allied player in 42. But looking at Spiderys numbers there seem to be some hope left. Then again Tom is a far better player then I am. But if there is hope... Tom is being a bit careless with his navy at times and perhaps some opportunities will present themselves in the coming months.

Just got home and got the turn off to Tom. I´ll try to do an update after that.

[Bullwinkle58]

Here's my three cents (inflation! [:)]) on Allied night bombing in 1942:

It's less worthless than the alternative.

If you have, say, five 4Es somewhere and you send them by day, without escorts (no range), they get chewed up. You lose most likely one to flak, and 1-2 more damaged and possible ops losses on landing. You probably do no damage. You might shoot down 1-2 Zeros.

If you do night bombing between 1/2 and 2/3 of the time the mission doesn't launch or gets lost. But there are probably no losses over the target. And you probably don't hit anything here either.

You're welcome. [8D]

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Here's my three cents (inflation! [:)]) on Allied night bombing in 1942:

It's less worthless than the alternative.

If you have, say, five 4Es somewhere and you send them by day, without escorts (no range), they get chewed up. You lose most likely one to flak, and 1-2 more damaged and possible ops losses on landing. You probably do no damage. You might shoot down 1-2 Zeros.

If you do night bombing between 1/2 and 2/3 of the time the mission doesn't launch or gets lost. But there are probably no losses over the target. And you probably don't hit anything here either.

You're welcome. [8D]

All I'll say here is: DL, DL, DL.... Mr. mind_messing knows what I'm talking about [;)]. I've had moderate/reasonable success with night bombing, at least as much as can be expected.

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Here's my three cents (inflation! [:)]) on Allied night bombing in 1942:

It's less worthless than the alternative.

If you have, say, five 4Es somewhere and you send them by day, without escorts (no range), they get chewed up. You lose most likely one to flak, and 1-2 more damaged and possible ops losses on landing. You probably do no damage. You might shoot down 1-2 Zeros.

If you do night bombing between 1/2 and 2/3 of the time the mission doesn't launch or gets lost. But there are probably no losses over the target. And you probably don't hit anything here either.

You're welcome. [8D]

All I'll say here is: DL, DL, DL.... Mr. mind_messing knows what I'm talking about [;)]. I've had moderate/reasonable success with night bombing, at least as much as can be expected.

I agree, also add in altitude. Fly just above the balloons with 9/10 detection level at Brisbane and see what you get against all those parked Betties & Zeroes.

Night bombing is funny, you can get no results with 9 out of 10 attacks, but then that 10th attacks gets snake eyes and you dish out tremendous amounts of damage.

Do it with everything you have. Mass strike with rested planes, air hq, big airfield.

Mr. Kane is using night bombing a lot against Spidery. Not sure when he started...